[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1r68shjhb.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:12:48 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
nigel@...el.suspend2.net, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec jump: fix compiling warning on xchg(&kexec_lock, 0) in kernel_kexec()
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Huang Ying wrote:
>>
>> - xchg(&kexec_lock, 0);
>> + locked = xchg(&kexec_lock, 0);
>> + BUG_ON(!locked);
>
> Why do you want to do this at all?
>
> And why do you implement your locks with xchg() in the first place? That's
> total and utter crap.
>
> Hint: we have _real_ locking primitives in the kernel.
This part certainly.
The way the code should work, and the way it has in the past is:
image = xchg(&kexec_image, NULL)
if (!image)
return -EINVAL;
Very simple and very obvious and very easy to get right, and it has
been that way for years.
Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists